W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > June 2012

Re: ISSUE-385: hasProvenanceIn: finding a solution

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 08:16:22 -0400
Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <774152F0-3E8D-489B-A5E3-20DD9E8BA3E6@rpi.edu>
To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>

On Jun 4, 2012, at 2:46 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:

> On 04/06/2012 03:14, Timothy Lebo wrote:
>>> I can see the point about trying to reuse the relation between the PAQ
>>> and the dm.
>> 
>> Unfortunately, I'm behind on the PAQ. But perhaps it's become required reading for the hasProvenanceIn decisionů
> 
> I'd say not.  I think any hasProvrenanceIn should stand independently of PROV-AQ.  Then, of the semantics (or lack of) are OK, PROV-AQ could use it, otherwise a different term.

Thanks, Graham.

If that's the case, then I'm in favor of having hasProvenanceIn (isReferencedBy :-( ) on the model side.

-Tim

> 
> #g
> --
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 4 June 2012 12:16:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:16 UTC